Impossible

 Is consciousness fundamental, or is it emergent?

This is the actual question being asked in scientific circles, but it often gets shut down by dogmatic skepticism. In other words, for many scientists, consciousness has to be emergent because reality would be miraculous if it isn’t—and science and miracles cannot occupy the same mathematical equations.

Cutting through the bull and getting right to the point, I will say this: Consciousness either creates our objective world, or it is a product of it.

It’s that simple.

Now, to state what I actually believe, I will tell you exactly what this question looks like to me:

“Either the music coming from this radio is coming from somewhere else, or it is being produced by the radio.”

Any really good scientist would consider this ridiculous and argue that metaphoric arguments just get in the way of actual science. I would argue that this objection is proof that you are trying to control your own research with your prior belief about what the research could possibly reveal.

What if water can become wine?

IMPOSSIBLE!

Of course it's impossible—but what if it’s possible?

Science is academic, not philosophic, and a question like this will always be answered before being investigated. Philosophers often dream of science without dogma, but science is far too advanced to include “nonsense” now. Research, in order to be respected, must not be contaminated by the spooky. It becomes necessary to filter out anything unexplainable. Scientists will often say that more research is needed in this area or that.

I think this is the part of the awakening Owen Barfield imagined many years ago. The hopeful can bring hope back into their private thinking, because much of what was ruled out by science is being reconsidered—and possibly ruled back in. What was once dogmatically declared impossible is now being entertained as perhaps possible in some way. However, dogma will still guard scientific research, and drawing obvious comparisons between modern science and ancient wisdom will still be shunned.

In modern times, water being turned into the finest wine would require a reasonable explanation. Any suggestion that this trick cannot be explained will still be dismissed. The parting of the Red Sea can be explained by the weather conditions of the period; the fact that the actual events may have been dramatized for religious vigor will never be the reason why science would look to the impossible for research.

I do not quarrel with science for this. Scientists have a responsibility—and making allowances for any of the millions of religious concepts would be shameful and, yes, pseudoscientific.

However—

When science itself begins to lay a foundation suggesting that qualia is a part of a creative experience, where phenomena are more fashioned than perceived by consciousness, I think it’s fair to get excited about the implications.

This idea also allows me to carry on spiritually, without any proof that I am on a fool’s path.

If anyone could offer me convincing proof that the God I seek is mere fantasy, I would seek a different God.

Science has not provided me with such proof. In fact, science is now saying that among all the possibilities is the possibility that consciousness pervades our universe. For me, this idea opened a gate that scientific dogma had locked with an academic padlock—to which no mystical key would ever be considered, much less tried.

Think of the many stories, the myths, the metaphors. Why would anyone consider Cinderella? How could she be the one who wore the glass slipper and won the heart of Prince Charming? Impossible.

How could Joseph be the source of sustenance his brothers desperately needed, when he’d been thrown into a well—by those brothers—a long time ago? Impossible.

How could David be the one who could face the giant? He was smaller than his brothers, and he wasn’t a war hero at all. Impossible.

The stories explain the mysterious to the point where the mystery is no longer mysterious to anyone willing to consider them.

Joseph Campbell devoted much of his time to researching myths. He found the monomyth, and he wrote and lectured about it for the rest of his life.

Everyone else has tried to pull the sword now. Prince Charming has tried to shove every foot into the glass slipper. The last war hero has now been considered to face the giant.

What now?

Now, everyone is looking at everything and reasonably wondering if the final, unlikeliest possibility could be the one everyone has been looking for: that consciousness creates reality.

Any moment now, the scientific stepmother will have no choice but to fetch consciousness away from her mundane chores and allow Universal Love to kneel and finally try the glass slipper on her. When the slipper of reality fits our humblest servant, Consciousness, she will finally be swept away to become the Creator—and the Companion of the Prince—at last.

Like Dorothy, she has always had this creative power, but now she is ready to awaken.

I do not want to close without stating why I feel this is a wonderful time to be alive: This is the time Owen Barfield wrote about long ago. He called it “Final Participation.”

What, then, is participation?

“Participation is the extra-sensory relation between man and the phenomena.”
— Owen Barfield

If you find yourself on this path, you will see that Final Participation is where we collectively begin to realize that our objective world is the masterpiece of our imagination.

In other words: It is ALL in your mind.

Where else could it be?